PRABHATI DEVI Vs. BALU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set aside the order dated 15.3.2008, whereby the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), rotputli, District Jaipur dismissed the application filed by the defendant-petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner it is noticed that the learned trial Court in its impugned order observed that the application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. could not be accepted on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit on the basis of valuation of the suit. In addition to above, the trial Court also observed that the petitioner-defendant failed to convince as to why the cause of action did not arise?

(3.) The Hon'ble Apex Court in plethora of cases has consistently held that the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution must be sparingly exercised to correct errors of jurisdiction and the like, but not to upset pure findings of fact. The Hon'ble Apex Court has also held that the High Court should not interfere with the order of the inferior Court, unless the same is found to be perverse or not based on any material or it results in manifesting injustice.